The Reality behind Poverty in the UK - Essay Example

The Reality behind Poverty in the UK Poverty has always stricken people around the world. Although it is a primarily pre-conceived thought that poverty occurs only in underdeveloped countries, it is not surprising that poverty also lurks in developed countries like the United States or United Kingdom. In the UK, for example, the latest data show that 11.5 million people (17%) in the country live in the low income bracket in 2004-2005 (Poverty.org.uk). The Poverty.org.uk used the threshold of low income indicated that "a household income that is 60% or less of the average (median) household income in that year".They estimated the 11.5 million earned "183 per week for a two adult household, 100 per week for a single adult, 268 per week for two adults living with two children, and 186 per week for a single adult living with two children" (See Figure 1). Figure 1. The Number of Low Income People in the UK from 1979 to 2005 (Source: Poverty.org.uk). Although the recent figures have lowered, the Poverty.org.uk analysed that the current status of poverty is better in the 1980s. Just recently, Poverty.org.uk released the data for homelessness in the UK and declared that "110,000 households (excluding the intentionally homeless) in England were officially recognised as newly homeless by their local authorities in 2006". As a global problem, poverty may be defined in absolute or relative terms. An absolute definition specifies a minimal level of well-being in nutrition, shelter, clothing, health, and so on and then determines what income is sufficient to maintain this level, taking into account family size and perhaps other factors, such as ages of family members and location of the family residence. This minimum level fluctuates with inflation and the general standard of living. Though always tied to the cost of material goods, this minimum income level also implies psychic consequences for those living below its standards: Poverty should be defined psychologically in terms of those whose place in the society is such that they are internal exiles who, almost inevitably, develop attitudes of defeat and pessimism and who are therefore excluded from taking advantage of new opportunities.1 Feelings of helplessness and powerlessness in the face of overwhelming political, economic, and social forces and personal tragedies help keep such persons mired in poverty. Yet, relative definitions of poverty do not specify a particular level of material well-being, but compare the poor to other members of society. In this definition a family is poor if its resources place it well below the average standard of living. Most relative definitions define poverty as any family income below one-half the nation's median family income. Another way of viewing poverty is of relative poverty, which goes beyond basic biological needs, and is not simply about a lack of money but also about exclusion from the customs of society. Relative poverty is about social exclusion imposed by an inadequate income as was noted in Faith in the City (Report of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Commission on Urban Priority Areas, 1985): "poverty is not only about shortage of money, it is about rights and relationships; about how people are treated and how they regard themselves; about powerlessness, exclusion and loss of dignity" (p. 185). Many policy analysts favour relative definitions of poverty because they focus on the inequality of income and wealth. A family is poor, many argue, if its income is insufficient to bring it close to the current median standard of living in society. This is why Peter Townsend, in his book Poverty in the United Kingdom (1979), issued a broader definition of poverty, where he stated that: Individuals, families and groups in the population can be said to be in poverty when they lack the resources to obtain the types of diet, participate in the activities and have the living conditions and amenities which are customaryin the societies to which they belongthey are in effect, excluded from ordinary living patterns, customs and activities (p. 31). The incidence of poverty does not fall evenly across the nation; particular areas, groups, and classes bear a far higher incidence of poverty than others. Although a majority of the poor are white, the incidence of poverty is higher among racial minorities, reflecting racial prejudice, low job skills, and poor education. Also, there is increasing reason to note the "feminisation of poverty." The majority of the poor now live in female-headed families, and the number of such families is growing. In Figure 2, more female wage-earners are earning less than their male counterparts. Figure 2. Income Proportion by Gender in the UK in 2006 (Source: Poverty.org.uk). The larger proportion of poverty among females reflects the demographic trends discussed where there are high rates of divorce and illegitimacy that place more women with small children in poverty. Lacking adequate child care facilities and so unable to work full-time and care for their children, they fall below the poverty line. Sometimes these women do work full-time, but at jobs that do not pay enough to support their families. For most of these female-headed households, poverty is a painful but temporary phenomenon that lasts until marriage or remarriage places them in a two-earner situation. Yet, for many it is a more or less permanent condition. Single parenthood has dire consequences for future generations with respect to education, illegitimacy, and social dependency. It was in the middle to late 1990s that United Kingdom had one of the highest poverty rates in Europe and among developed countries. An estimated 4.6 million children-one out of every three-were poor. The overall poverty rate was double what it had been in the late 1970s. According to the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Report 2005, this was the result of government policies of the 1980s that caused income inequality to increase at a remarkable rate: the wealthiest 20% of British society saw their annual incomes increase ten times more than those of the poorest 20%. In Making a Difference. Tackling Poverty-A Progress Report (2006), the United Kingdom's Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) reported that the number of people receiving unemployment benefits had risen 50% between 1979 and 1997; in addition, the number of single parent and disability benefits claims had tripled. In response, the government initiated a radical anti-poverty campaign in 1999, the main goal of which was to eradicate child poverty in Britain entirely by 2020. The results have been encouraging. Dziedzic (2006) cited Evan Davis, in his report "UK Poverty Line Is Moving Target" (9 March 2006) that the childhood poverty program had successfully moved about 100,000 British children per year out of poverty. However, Britain's relative method of calculating its poverty line meant that if incomes increased across all levels of society the line would likewise rise. This will result in even more people living in relative poverty. The answer, and the challenge for the government, Davis (9 March 2006) suggested, lies in increasing the incomes of poor people at a faster rate than the incomes of the wealthier members of the society. Poverty could also be rooted with unemployment rates. In fact, there has been a persistent level of unemployment in many European nations during the last decade or so, in spite of their virtually stagnant populations. However, more recently, unemployment has slightly decreased in some of the European Union countries. Since the late 1980s, poverty has also been linked to the state's decreasing capacity to provide, to the majority of citizens, the minimum conditions for entry to the market. Today, safety nets are failing some of the most vulnerable sections of European societies. The urban poor who end up homeless become, at some stage, unable to mobilize social capital in the form of family, networks, community bonding and shared values. Stripped of their capacity to compete in a market economy, deprived of state welfare support and devoid of social capital, most of those who fall into the trap of homelessness are people whose vulnerability has been exacerbated by health, drug and alcohol problems, as well as by physical and sexual abuse (Ghosh, 10 February 2003). As important indicator of poverty, it is also appropriate to take note of homelessness in the UK. The operational definition of homelessness adopted by the European Federation of National Organizations Working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) provided a simple but robust definition of housing vulnerability as individuals experiencing one of the following situations: Rooflessness: defined as rough sleeping. This is the most visible form of homelessness. People with chaotic lifestyles or unsettled ways of living may be disproportionately represented among the roofless population. Successful resettlement for rough sleepers may be contingent as much upon the availability of appropriate support as upon the availability of temporary and permanent housing. Houselessness: refers to situations where, despite access to emergency shelter or long-term institutions, individuals may still be classed as homeless due to a lack of appropriate support aimed at facilitating social reintegration. People who are forced to live in institutions because there is inadequate accommodation (with support) in the community to meet their needs are thus regarded as homeless. In this context, homelessness refers as much to the lack of housing as it does to the lack of social networks. Living in insecure housing: (insecure tenure or temporary accommodation) this may be a consequence of the inaccessibility of permanent housing. It may equally reflect the need for support to enable people to successfully hold a tenancy. The provision of appropriate support can be critical in helping people have access to permanent housing under their own tenancy. This category also includes people who are involuntarily sharing in unreasonable circumstances and people whose security is threatened by violence or threats of violence (for example, women at risk of domestic abuse, racial violence or harassment). Living in inadequate accommodation: includes people whose accommodation is unfit for habitation or is overcrowded (based on national or statutory standards), as well as those whose accommodation is a caravan or boat (Edgar et al., 2002). It is also important to suggest that domestic violence is the main cause of homelessness among women in England. FEANTSA (2002) indicated that a report from a charity organisation found that 63 percent of homeless women aged between 30 and 49 said domestic abuse was the key reason they had lost their homes. Over half of these women had slept rough, the majority on more than one occasion - despite the fact that this made them vulnerable to rape and abuse. Several resorted to drugs and alcohol to blot out the dangers. Other reasons why women said that they had become homeless were family breakdown, severe mental health problems and childhood abuse. Many avoided night shelters because they were deemed dirty, violent and unsafe. And a large proportion ended up staying too long in hostels. One woman had spent over 20 years in hostels. Some said hostel life was making them ill and several were on anti-depressants or were using drugs and alcohol. Many said they wanted to work, but felt it was not worth their while giving up housing benefit when the cost of hostel accommodation was so high. The majority of women said that they would welcome greater provision of move-on accommodation so they could free up places in hostels. These women wanted more support to make the transition away from homelessness. Homelessness in the advanced economies has changed significantly over the past decade. Furthermore, homelessness stories do not relate to individuals only, but to families in ways that suggest the failure of traditional welfare systems to adapt to today's changed social and family circumstances. Families become homeless for many complex and often inter-related reasons: debt, rent arrears, unemployment, relationship breakdown and domestic violence, mental illness, substance abuse and disability, which can create a cycle of instability, causing families to become homeless time and again as problems remain unresolved and local and national agencies fail to intervene effectively. In many large cities, rising rents, severe shortages of public housing and increased demand for crisis accommodation have meant that thousands of young people, families and elderly people are being turned away from housing services and left to fend for themselves on the streets because there is nowhere else for them to go. The dwindling of employment opportunities for people with a secondary school education or less is contributing to the widening gap between the rich and the poor (United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2004). The causes of poverty are numerous and arguments about the direct link between poverty and globalization have been recurrent in recent social and political analyses. Triggered or not triggered by globalization, long-term unemployment, job insecurity and insufficient safety nets have, in combination, generated various forms of poverty and social exclusion have manifested in advanced economies like the UK. Although poverty in the UK has dwindled recently, it is no reason to be complacent. As social insecurity and uncertainty become ever more widespread and corrosive, as the miracles of the free market continue to be promised for tomorrow but never achieved today, the problem of poverty will remain as one of the major social challenges in British society. The challenge thus becomes, how to work towards a national and a world order in which everyone has the capacity to make informed choices about their own lives, and the opportunity to realise their potential, thereby fulfilling themselves in ways that, as though guided by an invisible hand, enrich and strengthen the social bonds that unite and dignify people. Hills (February 2006) deemed that "any success in tackling underlying inequalities will come too slowly to counter the continuing polarisation of economic opportunities. Those without access to capital, home ownership and good education for their children will fall further behind". If the British government want to diminish poverty, it should start to concentrate on strengthening its labour laws, add support to women and to improve its social security system. References DWP. (2006). Making a Difference. Tackling Poverty-A Progress Report. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Dwp.org.uk: www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/dwp/2006/poverty/tackling-poverty.pdf. Dziedzic, N. (2006). World Poverty. Detroit: Thomson Gale. Edgar, B., Doherty, J., & Meert, M. (2002, November) Review of Statistics on Homelessness in Europe. European Observatory on Homelessness, p. 5. FEANTSA.(2002). Immigration and Homelessness in the European Union. In Analysis and Overview of the Impact of Immigration on Homeless Services in the European Union. Brussels: FEANTSA. Ghosh, A (2003, February 10). Down and Out in Europe, Time Magazine, 161(6). Hills, J. (2006, February).Why Isn't Poverty History Stratification and Inequality: Just Over 100 Years Ago.Sociology Review15(3):8-12. Report of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Commission on Urban Priority Areas. (1985). Faith in the City, A Call for Action by Church and Nation, Volume 15, Part 1, London, Church House. The Poverty Site. (2007). Homelessness. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Poverty.org.uk: http://www.poverty.org.uk/49/index.shtml. The Poverty Site. (2007). Numbers in Low Income. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Poverty.org.uk: http://www.poverty.org.uk/01/index.shtml. The Poverty Site. (2007). The Pay Inequalities. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Poverty.org.uk: http://www.poverty.org.uk/32/index.shtml. Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the United Kingdom. Harmondsworth, Penguin. UN Development Programme. (2005). Human Development Report 2005. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Undp.org: www.sd.undp.org/HDR/HDR05e.pdf. UN Human Settlements Programme Staff. (2004). State of the World's Cities: Globalization and Urban Culture. Toronto: Earthscan Canada. Read More